Public Advocate Court Brief Shows NY Times May Be Guilty of Defamation

April 4, 2010

Public Advocate Court Brief Shows NY Times May Be Guilty of
Defamation or Libel Against Pope

In recent weeks the New York Times has pursued a public libel of
moral leaders of the Roman Catholic Church in its published
editions. Public Advocate believes in the first amendment but there
is no free speech right to destroy the freedom of religion or
attack a religious leader in a malicious manner.

The New York Times claims as "news" memos and letters from 30
years ago every day for weeks. Propaganda on the order of Orwell's
1984 but in the hands of a secular newspaper promoting gay rights
and the destruction of the moral order for decades.

Public Advocate legal papers filed in the 1999-2000 Boy
Scouts litigation before the U.S. Supreme Court show adult
homosexuals by and large prey on young men out of proportion to the
general population and our legal reasoning was, in part, to favor
banning adult homosexuals to reduce the attacks on children. We
believe any attacks on the Catholic Church ignores legal precedent
in this country on several fronts to protect children and
demonstrate malice towards moral people who are in fact protecting
children.

Here we have the New York Times, the promoter of the
immoral order claiming moral authority over the pope. Claiming it
does not make it so.

There is no real factual basis on the part of the NY Times
allegations-- that the pope did anything more than the law in the
United States allowed 30 years ago, thus the false nature of the
assault.

Liberals at the NY Times know this. We believe that is what
motivates their attack, that they are frustrated by the current
legal blocks to the previous wholesale infiltration by homosexuals
of the Catholic Church.

And they are really not interested in preventing assaults on
children by priests as the NYT's agenda is a promotion of gays in
the boy scouts, in the church, as teachers and in the military,
thus the demonstration of malice.

This malice is clearly directed at the head of a Church.

LIBERALS MAD THAT THE CHURCH HAS BANNED OPEN HOMOSEXUALS

Today, the Catholic Church has rightly banned practicing
homosexuals from being priests and this has cut down the incidents
of abuse of children by so-called priests who are really homosexual
infiltrators using the church for sinful and illegal activities. It
is not current news.

Now other countries with liberal policies are under attack-- for
not banning homosexuals and it is in those countries -- not the
United States of America-- where there are fresh incidents. That's
the whole story with balance.

LIBERALS MAD THAT BOY SCOUTS HAVE BANNED OPEN HOMOSEXUALS

Likewise back in 1999 Public Advocate lawyers made the case
bluntly to the Supreme Court in a friend of the court brief Boy
Scouts of America and Monmouth Council, Boy Scouts of America,
Petitioners,v . James Dale, Respondent.__ On Petition for a Writ of
Certiorari To the Supreme Court of New Jersey along with a separate
brief filed in the Supreme Court later.

The Supreme Court voted five to four to allow the Boy Scouts to
ban practicing homosexuals and the incidents of abuse of young boys
dropped dramatically. It is not news anymore.

In that court brief Public Advocate bluntly said what most
conservatives know is the truth: adult homosexuals
disproportionately prey on young boys. PA did not say "all"
homosexuals. We showed that large numbers disproportionately prey
or recruit younger boys and men.

From the Public Advocate Court brief (petition):

Pedophilia plays a key role in the recruitment of future
homosexuals. Regarding the homosexual recruitment process, noted
sex researchers Masters and Johnson observed:

In most instances, homophile interests developed in the early to
midteens.... There was no history of overt heterosexual experience
prior to homophile orientation. Recruitment usually was
accomplished by an older male, frequently in his twenties, but
occasionally men in their thirties were the initiators. When the
homosexual commitment was terminated, in most instances, the
relationship was broken by the elder partner. With termination, the
teenager was left with the concept that whether or not he continued
as an active homosexual, he would always be homophile-oriented. [W.
Masters and V. Johnson, Human Sexual Inadequacy (Boston: Little,
Brown and Company, 1970), pp. 179-180.]

In one study (Bell and Weinberg, supra, p. 87), over 60 percent
of the respondents identified their first homosexual partner as
someone older; in another (P. Gephard and A.P. Johnson, The Kinsey
Data: Marginal Tabulations of the 1958-63 Interviews Conducted by
the Institute for Sex Research (Indiana University Press:
Bloomington, Ind., 1979), p. 495), over 64 percent of the
respondents identified their first homosexual partner as having
initiated the sexual experience.

During the period 1971 through November 1991, the Boy Scouts banned
1,871 individuals from Scouting for sexual abuse. P. Boyle, Scout's
Honor (Rocklin, Calif.: Prima Publishing, 1984), p. 315. (Not all
of these cases involved male scout leaders abusing male Scouts). At
least 2,071 Scouts reported being abused by leaders, with another
2,737 victims who may or may not have been Scouts. Boyle, p.
316.

It could be said that based on their experience as well
as the social science literature, the Boy Scouts would be violating
the trust conferred on them by the parents of countless young boys
if they allowed avowed homosexuals to continue in leadership roles,
modeling their lifestyle to those impressionable boys, resulting in
the very immoral behavior by those boys which the Boy Scout Oath
and Law seek to avoid.

From the Public Advocate Court brief (Merits):

If the ruling below were upheld, the Boy Scouts of America,
their affiliates and their volunteers would be unfairly and
unreasonably exposed to increased risks of liability, and the boy
scouts, themselves, would be unnecessarily exposed to risks of harm
and injury. These heightened risks -- of injury and of legal
liability -- are especially noteworthy in this case.

Forcing the Boy Scouts to accept avowed homosexuals as
adult leaders would increase the risk of sexual molestation of
young boys, given the fact that certain homosexual activists
encourage legalizing sex with all persons, including minors. E.
Rueda, The Homosexual Network: Private Lives and Public
Policy, pp. 202-203 (Old Greeenwich, Conn.: The Derbin Adair
Company, 1982). Additionally, there is evidence that the proportion
of homosexual pedophiles is considerably higher than that of
heterosexual pedophiles, and by one estimate, homosexual teachers
are 90 to 100 times more likely to become sexually involved with
their students than are heterosexuals. See, e.g.,
G. Gallup, "Attitudes toward Homosexuals and Evolutionary Theory:
The Role of Evidence," 17 Ethology and Sociobiology 281-84
(1996).

Having ignored both the common law principles underlying the
public accommodation laws and the possible consequences of a ruling
forcing the Boy Scouts to accept a homosexual activist as a
scoutmaster, the New Jersey Supreme Court also erroneously disposed
of the Boy Scout's constitutional claim of freedom of association.
Indeed, that court paid no attention to the true legacy of freedom
of association, neglecting even to address the relevant
constitutional text establishing that freedom, and misapplying this
Court's precedents upholding that freedom.